Lane Filler commentary: Multiple-issue legislation is the cause of many of our problems

Also in Opinion

Subscribe to The Dispatch

Already a subscriber?
Enroll in EZPay and get a free gift!
Enroll now.

Saturday October 5, 2013 5:03 AM

House Speaker John Boehner is being manipulated by his more-rabid Republican members. They want
to stop Obamacare and are willing to bring the nation to a screeching halt via government shutdown
and destroy our financial system with a debt default to make it happen. Or they just want to bring
the federal government to a screaming halt, and stopping Obamacare is the cherry on top.

Regardless, watching it play out is going to make us feel like we just ate a poison-ivy
salad.

A bit of fault also goes to President Barack Obama. He postponed the part of Obamacare that made
companies give health care to employees or face fines, but refused to postpone the requirement on
those workers he’s not making companies cover, to get their own insurance or pay fines. I don’t
know why, honestly. The mainstream media haven’t asked him to explain it, which, since the
president is protecting corporations like he’s Mitt Romney hidden in a Barack Obama costume, is
surprising.

To be fair, the media have been busy explaining the sociological significance of Miley Cyrus and
twerking to a concerned public.

We’ve been here before, and recently. We now face world-altering deadlines and defining moments
of truth so frequently they should be named like movie sequels:
Fiscal Cliff of Doom III: This Time it’s About the Health Care.

We could have a solution, if we focus on the right problem.

That problem, and it goes beyond this particular crisis, is multiple-issue legislation. In this
case, House Republicans started out with a bill that combined repealing Obamacare with funding the
rest of the federal government, two pretty much unrelated issues. They have since doubled down, and
are now willing to fund the government only if Obamacare is put off for a year, the Keystone XL
pipeline is built, regulatory agencies no longer are allowed to impose regulations,
Duck Dynasty gets a monument on the National Mall and Obama, a Harvard Law School
graduate, wears a Yale sweatshirt every day for a month.

The idea is to force the opposition to grant something you want by tying it to something they
want. In this case, the most extreme House Republicans want to repeal Obamacare, and Obama wants
the United States to be a functioning nation-state, so … man, does this seem stupid when you
actually type it. How is that a trade?

Candidate 2: “No, I voted to fund bandages for soldiers who get blown up. The ‘Plague for
Orphans Amendment’ was tacked on as a rider.”

The “One Subject at a Time Act,” which is an actual bill introduced in the House by Rep. Tom
Marino, R-Pa., would require each bill to be about only one subject, and stand or fall on its
merits.

Many states have such rules in their constitutions, excluding only budget legislation, because
having a separate bill for every budget item is impossible. Fair enough. But every substantive
policy and funding issue should be voted on separately.

With about 5 percent of congressional races truly competitive, politicians know compromise,
which can be used against them during a primary, doesn’t pay. If compromise doesn’t pay, then
multiple-issue bills, rather than guaranteeing multiple things get done at once, guarantee that
nothing does. And all of this seems to be getting worse, not better.